LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:11:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46313F99.6080402@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070426162530.bc30a1bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:49:05 -0400 Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> If the tv_nsec value of either of the elements of the utimes parameter to utimensat() is UTIME_OMIT no update of that respective value is performed.
>
> ITYM "If the value of either of the elements..."
>
> +#define UTIME_NOW ((1l << 30) - 1l)
> +#define UTIME_OMIT ((1l << 30) - 2l)
>
> OK, so there's no collision on ts_nsec if unnormalised timespecs are
> disallowed.
>
> But there's a potential collision on ts_sec? Do we know what date that
> corresponds to?
"If the tv_nsec value" implies that these magic numbers have no impact
on these.
I'm a bit leery of abusing the timespec value like this, though. A
flags field seem like it would be cleaner.
Something else... if we're dickering with these interfaces, shouldn't we
allow setting atime as well?
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-27 0:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-26 22:49 Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-26 23:25 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-27 0:11 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2007-04-27 0:55 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 0:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-27 1:04 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 23:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-27 23:05 ` David Lang
2007-04-27 23:30 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 23:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-27 0:54 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 15:27 ` Updated utimensat test program Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 1:57 ` [PATCH] utimensat implementation Neil Brown
2007-04-27 2:13 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-27 6:01 ` Neil Brown
2007-05-10 18:26 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-10 18:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-10 19:44 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-13 21:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-11 1:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-11 2:14 ` Neil Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46313F99.6080402@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).